SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Several sites are reporting, without reference to IBM's activities 70 years ago, that Microsoft's contact with ICE (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is drawing fire online. The Computer Business Review includes a quote from Microsoft now missing from their press release:
"ICE's decision to accelerate IT modernization using Azure Government will help them innovate faster while reducing the burden of legacy IT. The agency is currently implementing transformative technologies for homeland security and public safety, and we're proud to support this work with our mission-critical cloud," he wrote.
KUOW radio writes on their web site that Microsoft is facing outrage their for blog post touting ICE contract:
As outrage grew online, a Microsoft employee quietly removed mention of ICE from the January press release this morning. Social media users noticed that, too. The company has since restored the press release's original language, and called its removal a "mistake."
After a little bit of conference swag gets handed out and a few advertising contracts^W^Wscholarships get handed out, this will all blow over and be forgotten.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @07:32PM (48 children)
Ice's job is to enforce the border
Why is this a problem?
Theres something like 25 million illegals in this country.
And if news reports are to be believed, another 2000 kids (and their families) have showed up in the last 6 weeks alone.
We are destined to become another central american country if this continues..
If parents don't want their kids taken from them then don't cross into another country illegally.
Sheesh, why is this so hard to understand..
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @07:42PM (3 children)
When they install showers and new industrial bread oven in ex-Walmart stores, there is nothing to worry about.
The dog kennels for kids really look fun to play in. Dodge ball anyone?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @07:46PM
They aren't doing this.
So no I'm not worried. .
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:26PM (1 child)
All right stop
Immigration edition
ICE is back with a brand new invention
Beaner grabs hold of a shower curtain
Wall mart knows that this business is certain
Will it ever stop?
Yo, I don't know
Build the wall and never go
To the border, they'll not be here in the first place
Lefty up the stake but can't stand the rare taste
ICE ICE baby
ICE ICE baby
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday June 19 2018, @11:46PM
^ good flow
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday June 19 2018, @07:57PM (10 children)
You can enforce the borders without doing this. Don't be a fucking numpty. Wanna get serious about cracking down on illegals? Fine the ever-loving FUCK out of any company that employs them. You'll see that shit go down reeeeal quick.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0, Troll) by frojack on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:14PM (7 children)
Please specify HOW. No handwaiving magical solutions into existance. Exact procedures please oh wise one.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 4, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:22PM (2 children)
Please specify HOW.
1: put entire family in a bus.
2: drive bus to Mexico.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:27PM (1 child)
They don't get a right to due process in your world?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:02PM
Then the kids get locked up with the parents. I am very liberal in many areas, but no you don't just let them go free inside the country.
So here are the options:
Immediate repatriation, no due process.
Family stays locked up together until everyone involved is cleared to leave
Kids get sent to seperate facilities that better match their rights, while adults are tried for their crime.
I will support all three, I will not support letting them go into the states. I am willing to bet NONE of these alternatives are to your liking and that this is a round about way to argue for them all to be set free in the country.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @10:11PM (2 children)
Stream video, and broadcast TV over the border. Show gruesome torture. Nobody else will make the trip. Fewer people would get hurt, because almost nobody would be crazy enough to try.
Any style will do: ancient, medieval, high-tech...
We can sandpaper them to death. We can use the breaking wheel. We can crucify them. We can stone them. We can submerge them in acid. We can catapult them. We can fire them from cannons. We can draw and quarter them. We can starve them. We can smoke them. We can boil them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @10:27PM
That's what you're keeping out. [ranker.com] Ask Barry [twitter.com] or Hillary [youtu.be]
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Wednesday June 20 2018, @12:36AM
Let me tell you, we did a couple of examples. Which the Fake News MSM ignored. Claudia Patricia Gómez González and Roxana Hernandez. RIP!!!!
And you'll be seeing more and more examples, believe me. Until our Border is safe and our Immigration Law is fixed. Any Immigration Bill MUST HAVE full funding for the Wall, end Catch & Release, Visa Lottery and Chain, and go to Merit Based Immigration. Go for it! WIN!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2018, @01:41AM
Please specify HOW.
If you bothered to read the rest of the post, you would have your answer. Most illegals are trucked in by big agriculture and textile industries.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:36PM (1 child)
Tell that to your congressmen. The executive branch can only execute the laws written by the legislative branch. So, if you have a problem with the law being enforced as written, then get it changed. I'm with you on increased penalties for employment of illegal immigrants and I think we could modify the laws around detainment procedures to minimize the separation of families while still being able to enforce immigration laws. Combine those with improved border security and a streamlined legal immigration process and we'd be getting closer to a sane immigration policy.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Wednesday June 20 2018, @12:44AM
They said I couldn't do tariffs. But that I can do treaties (w/Senate) & Executive Orders. And we needed tariffs very badly. So I'm putting tariffs in Executive Orders. And it's working, nobody told me "no." WIN!!!!
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @07:58PM
What the OP wrote is NOT flamebait. It is a statement which contains facts and it is presented in a very rational manner.
That it was modded as flamebait shows just what a high percentage of stupid people spend time on Soylent. If any of you fools ever become adults, you will rightly be deeply embarrassed at who you once were. But for now, fuck you clueless fucktards.
(Score: 2, Redundant) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:10PM (16 children)
It's hard to understand because the law was written with the intent to sabotage its own enforcement by making the consequences of enforcement a political landmine. That way some congresscritters can look "tough on immigration" while others show their "humanitarian" cred all while preventing any meaningful change to the status quo. Except now we have an administration that actually wants to do something to address immigration and appears quite willing to stomp on landmines just because the loud noises that follow are fun.
(Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:24PM (15 children)
You are repeating a LIE. The law absolutely does not require separating children from their families.
This is entirely the result of a Jeff Sessions policy decision:
Attorney General Announces Zero-Tolerance Policy for Criminal Illegal Entry [justice.gov]
(Score: 0, Troll) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:47PM (14 children)
What part is a lie? The law requires separation of children from their families if the adult parents/guardians are being detained for prosecution and there are no family members legally in the country that are willing to accept custody. If that isn't the case, then ICE is illegally kidnapping people's children, which would be an even bigger story.
(Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:00PM (13 children)
What part is a lie? The law requires separation of children from their families if the adult parents/guardians are being detained for prosecution and there are no family members legally in the country that are willing to accept custody.
That is simply FALSE. Why the hell do you think they only STARTED separating families in April? Before that they we allowed to stay together throughout the entire process.
No, the Law Does Not Require Separating Immigrant Children from Parents [patheos.com]
There is, of course, no such law. There is an administration policy that everyone who crosses the border illegally must be immediately charged criminally, even if they request asylum. Previous presidents have put asylum seekers into family detention centers, which keeps them together until they can get a hearing before a judge to consider their case, after which they are either allowed into the country or deported — but kept together as a family the entire time, regardless of the outcome.
Fact check: There is no law that requires family separation at the border, despite Trump administration's claims [dallasnews.com]
In reality, mandatory family separation is a consequence of a policy decision that can be changed at any time.
Was the ‘Law to Separate Families’ Passed in 1997 or ‘by Democrats’? [snopes.com]
There is no federal law mandating children and parents be separated at the border; a policy resulting in that outcome was enacted in May 2018.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:31PM
So build the wall! [independent.co.uk]
(Score: 2, Troll) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:58PM (11 children)
The only policy change that occurred in May 2018 is that ICE was directed to prosecute all illegal immigration cases.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday June 19 2018, @10:46PM (10 children)
I haven't researched this as thoroughly as one might and it's possible I'm wrong, but as far as I know, what you're saying here is exactly the truth of the matter. The change was the policy to criminally prosecute ALL cases, so-called zero tolerance policy.
And you get labeled troll for stating it plainly.
Trump derangement syndrome is a real thing, people see red and don't think. They downmod you here, for instance, instead of attacking the actual policy decision that's been identified. They don't seem to actually care about the policy, only about hating Trump.
It's a horrible decision, btw. Discretion is a good thing, tolerance is one of the core values of our civilization, 'zero tolerance' policies are both a sign and a substance of our degradation.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by pipedwho on Tuesday June 19 2018, @11:08PM
So true, this pre-judgement 'zero tolerance' policy is equivalent to having a policy jail all cases of assault pre-trial, even where there is a clear claim of self-defence.
If someone attacks you, there is legal recourse since your act of self-defence was forced on you. The same is true for an actual refugee, who are forced out of their country due by threat of death or persecution. They are then stateless, and have to enter a country somewhere. International law through treaties have held that refugees have special legal status. It is fairly recent thing that countries detain refugees, mainly because the countries that people are fleeing to are also countries that have 'caused' some of the problems that require the fleeing in the first place. So naturally some disgruntled victims of invasion are acting as 'refugees' to 'bring the fight' to the aggressor nations. The assumption is that these people are not real refugees and must be filtered out and 'dealt with' somehow. Maybe that's true, but like any legal structure going back to the signing of the Magna Carta, there should be some reasonable due process and oversight involved.
'Zero tolerance' and 'mandatory sentencing' policies for anything (drunk driving, non-visa border crossing, gang association, copyright infringement, jaywalking, etc) fail this due process of oversight.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @11:14PM (7 children)
Thanks. I think there's absolutely room for debate about whether a zero-tolerance policy makes sense. There's also a need to debate whether we should allow for families to be detained together when they cross the border illegally and how we can do that while still protecting minors from child smuggling.
My personal take is that we shouldn't tolerate any illegal crossings, but there should be quite a bit of discretion in the penalties for doing so. For example, those honestly seeking asylum who end up crossing illegally because they don't know the correct process should be deported without prejudice and redirected to the closest port of entry. While those who have illegally crossed repeatedly and have records of violent crimes in the US should be penalized in a way that ensures they never have the opportunity to come back (some combination of prison and deportation, probably).
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Wednesday June 20 2018, @12:58AM (6 children)
And that still sounds like the zero tolerance nonsense coming right back out.
There are lots of technically illegal acts that are not actually unlawful. This is the space that is under attack, the space they want to erase from our consciousness and our consciences.
It may be illegal to set poke your big toe across the border and pull it back, but you'd be insane to do anything other than ignore such an 'invasion.' It may be technically illegal to cross the border without a visa, full stop; but when someone fleeing for their life crosses a border inadvertently, without any criminal intention, there is no criminal act to prosecute - only a bare status offense. When someone applying for asylum becomes confused and fails to fill out precisely the correct forms in the right way, submits them improperly, etc. there is similarly no criminal act to prosecute. This is utter insanity, it's the cargo-cult version of law and order.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by slinches on Wednesday June 20 2018, @05:03AM (5 children)
I generally agree that zero tolerance policies are garbage, but illegal immigration is a special case. Most infractions are transitory in nature. An offense is committed and then people go back to normal legal activity. Illegal immigration, however is a continuous status. They don't have legal standing which makes them an easy target for criminal activity and exploitation. So not enforcing the law 100% is in effect creating a sub-class of people who don't have access to the support of the law.
Instead, if we can have compassionate penalties in cases where the only intent is to improve their lives, then we can solve both problems at once.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Arik on Wednesday June 20 2018, @06:36AM (4 children)
What's new is they are now choosing to file criminal charges against the asylum seekers! Not only in cases where they have a reason to suspect lack of honesty or sincerity (which, again, would just be continuing normal policy,) no the order went down to charge every single person, mechanically, without discretion.
And of course once they slap the cuffs on the parents and haul them away for daring to come and apply for asylum, the children are now 'unaccompanied' and must be seized as well.
This is not required, and it has no connection I can see to anything that you wrote.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by slinches on Wednesday June 20 2018, @02:54PM (3 children)
Is this happening to asylum seekers who legally apply at a port of entry? If so, that's a very different story, but I don't believe I've heard anything to indicate that.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2018, @03:31PM (1 child)
Yes! It's literally the reason people are in an uproar. You might want to find better resources if you haven't heard anything about that yet.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Wednesday June 20 2018, @04:53PM
Please point me to a reference for that. All of the cases I've heard of are for illegal border crossings (i.e. not at a port of entry)
(Score: 2) by Arik on Thursday June 21 2018, @01:47AM
If you go to an official port of entry, go straight up to the first officer you see, and tell him you want to apply for asylum, then you should be allowed to apply for asylum and not be arrested still.
However any deviation from that, for any reason whatsoever, is to result in criminal charges. Many people fail to comply perfectly with such procedures every day, in many cases this may be technically illegal, but it's still not normal for charges to result when it's an innocent mistake and there was no criminal intent. Apparently we have no more innocent mistakes, we've simply resolved that they don't exist, and so we shall no longer see them. This is extremely bad policy.
On top of that, there are numerous reports that what happens when people actually follow the correct procedure, they're simply told no, go away, or waved off with a 'try tomorrow.' If true, this is a problem on more than one level - systematic disregard for the law inside the executive branch, and creating a moral hazard for legitimate asylum seekers who might well respond to such tactics by using another crossing, when they would not otherwise have broken any laws.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @11:18PM
It's the emotional hot button issue going into the midterms. The Democrats don't want people to think rationally; "think of the children" is pure emotional manipulation. The popular opinion is that some democrats need to stop thinking of children [youtu.be]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:17PM (11 children)
Ice's job is to enforce the border
You do realize that it's possible to deport people without stealing their children first, right?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:54PM
Actually no its not.. the 'process' imposed by current legislation is why this whole round-about approach is happening.
If it was as simple as 'apprehend and instantly deport', they would be doing it already..
(Score: 1, Redundant) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @08:56PM (8 children)
It is certainly possible, but it requires changing the law to allow that to happen.
(Score: 4, Touché) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:08PM (7 children)
It is certainly possible, but it requires changing the law to allow that to happen.
Show me the law liar.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by frojack on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:30PM (4 children)
https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/training/xus/crcl/asylumseekers/crcl_asylum/pdfs/Immigration%20and%20Nationality%20Act%20101(a)(42).pdf [dhs.gov]
Immediate deportation is not possible if the illegal immigrant utters one word: Refugee. Also helps their case if the second word is Lawyer.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Aegis on Tuesday June 19 2018, @11:16PM (3 children)
LOL, "Refugee" is a term of art for a LEGAL immigrant! [uscis.gov]
Refugee status is a form of protection that may be granted to people who meet the definition of refugee and who are of special humanitarian concern to the United States.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @11:21PM (2 children)
Right and the minute someone utters the word "refugee" they cannot be instantly deported, they must be detained until they've been processed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2018, @12:07AM (1 child)
Oh the humanity! They force those poor ICE agents to do some actual police work? Say it ain't so!!!
Da fuck is wrong with you?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 20 2018, @12:50AM
It's called sanity. Make a refugee claim at a legal crossing point, don't get arrested and children will not be separated. Get flagged as an illegal and get treated like an illegal. Any other policy encourages human trafficking - something ms13 are known for.
(Score: 0, Troll) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @10:16PM (1 child)
U.S. Code § 1325.
It is illegal to cross the border anywhere but at a port of entry. The adults who cross illegally are detained immediately and criminally charged, making the minors with them legally "unaccompanied minors" and the law is followed for their processing separately from the parents.
Those that seek asylum at a port of entry with their children and who have not committed a crime are not separated and continue to stay together through the normal asylum process.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Hawkwind on Wednesday June 20 2018, @04:50AM
Not seeing the language your citing: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1325 [cornell.edu]
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 19 2018, @09:11PM
Ohh, now the left wants to talk about stealing children? [twitter.com]
Being detained by immigration officials is not that!
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Thexalon on Tuesday June 19 2018, @10:26PM (2 children)
So, honest question: If the 25 million people you mentioned had gone through the same sort of process as, say, your ancestors might have on Ellis Island, would you still have a problem with them? That process would look something like:
1. Check that your country of origin doesn't think you're someone we'd consider a criminal. (It's important to use our standards and not theirs because there are lots of places where you can be considered a criminal for, say, opposing the king's policies.)
2. Go through a medical exam to look for diseases that will either prevent you from supporting yourself, or be contagious and infect others.
3. Check that you have enough money to get started, and job prospects that will enable you to support yourself.
4. Here's the oaths you need to take to become a citizen.
5. OK, you're a citizen.
6. Sometimes, when the US has been at war, there's been an additional step of: You look like a reasonably healthy person of military age. We'd like you to join the Army.
I'm sure we could set up something like that in San Diego and El Paso.
So why aren't we doing this? We have the space: There are millions of vacant homes in the US, and even more vacant land. Making it possible and relatively easy to immigrate legally means these folks would be paying taxes, which would more than offset the cost of the immigration facilities.
Of course, you let on the real reason with this sentence:
You mean adopting aspects of Central American culture? The US already does that: Lots of US citizens already salsa dance, drink margaritas, speak Spanish, practice Catholicism, eat tacos and tropical fruits, and play norteño music. What's the problem?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday June 19 2018, @10:37PM
I can't speak for the OP, but I think we should definitely have a streamlined immigration process along those lines, but there's a strong argument that we should be a bit more selective than we were in the early 20th century. Since then we have implemented some social welfare programs and grown in population quite a lot, so verifying that immigrants can support themselves and their family in our current system is warranted. That's not to say that we should hyper-restrictive, just that the threshold has risen a little since the Ellis Island days
(Score: 2) by edinlinux on Wednesday June 20 2018, @07:10AM
I am the OP, sure I will answer..
If they went through the process, then yes..fine. however, in that case, it is unlikely all 25 million would have gotten in.
Why, because US immigration policy favors people from many countries (not just from Mexico). It also favors people with educations, and who can contribute in a variety of ways, from a variety of cultures...and not just one..
And guess what.. my family actually did actually immigrate here (and they are still alive and remember it)... but the difference is they did it legally. They waited in the queue, filed the forms, passed the exams and tests, got an education and learned English..
But guess what.. Probably they could not today, because we are neck deep in Mexicans (and other central Americans) who cut ahead of the line and came here illegally, choking off legal immigration.
Re: salsa, margarita, tacos and music, that is all nice and we had all that in the 80s already.
But now we got banditos, large barrios in many cities and MS-13 Mexican gangs too..
I don't want that in my country.. take it back to Mexico please.. Please get out, get in line and follow the process, like we did..